God's sovereignty and the responsibility of mankind. A reformed question.

[JAL]

You are trying to convince me of your position? What is the biblical support?

Rational people tend to prefer coherence over incoherence. Let's recap ONE area of incoherence in the traditional view (and I can list you about five of them). According to the Hypostatic Union, God placed a created human soul - He literally selected one of us - in Mary's womb. Had YOUR soul been the one selected, we'd now be worshiping it as a member of the Trinity - Quadrinity?

Pray tell, show me the biblical support for this view. Prove to me that your soul is eligible to become a member of the Trinity.

 

[JAL]

My claim is that the Father moved the physical Son, or at least a piece of Him, into Mary's womb.

You are trying to convince me of your position? What is the biblical support?

John 1:14 is pretty convincing to me:

"The Word became flesh".

When I eat a sandwich, my digestive system transforms it into flesh. The sandwich literally becomes flesh. Therefore, physical substances easily become flesh. An immaterial sandwich becoming flesh would somehow be a material-immaterial sandwich, and thus a contradiction in terms.

If your thirst for the incoherent is unquenchable, there's nothing I can do about it.

 

[Jonaitis]

Rational people tend to prefer coherence over incoherence. Let's recap ONE area of incoherence in the traditional view (and I can list you about five of them). According to the Hypostatic Union, God placed a created human soul - He literally selected one of us - in Mary's womb. Had YOUR soul been the one selected, we'd now be worshiping it as a member of the Trinity - Quadrinity?

Pray tell, show me the biblical support for this view. Prove to me that your soul is eligible to become a member of the Trinity.

Who selects a soul to be a member of the Trinity? You said, "Had your soul been the one selected," but by whom? Who decided that I would not the Father, but the one who acts in the name of Father? It sounds like you are speaking of an even greater and ineffable principle behind the Trinity that decided who participates in the Trinitarian structure. I would not say that you are wrong, though.

 

[Jonaitis]

My claim is that the Father moved the physical Son, or at least a piece of Him, into Mary's womb.

John 1:14 is pretty convincing to me:

"The Word became flesh".

When I eat a sandwich, my digestive system transforms it into flesh. The sandwich literally becomes flesh. Therefore, physical substances easily become flesh. An immaterial sandwich becoming flesh would somehow be a material-immaterial sandwich, and thus a contradiction in terms.

If your thirst for the incoherent is unquenchable, there's nothing I can do about it.

How does something that does not physically exist become something that does?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

I think I must mention. I embrace reformed theology as truth and the truth of scripture but im having a hard time accepting this question. That being said, Gods sovereignty and mans responsiblility go hand in hand. On one field we have God's sovereignty. Which means that God declares everything that comes to pass and there is nothing that has happened or ever will happen that wasn't foreordained by God (Ps 139:16, Is 46:10-13).

On the other field we have mankind's responsibility to accept Christ. My question is, if God has declared everything that comes to pass how therefore can we avoid God's wrath and how can God still be a just God by leaving the lost in their sins and then declaring on judgement day that they're guilty for not believing? Again, I don't mean to make fun of or disprove reformed theology I'm just asking a question. Because, nobody can do anything outside of God's will. I know Paul answered this very question with a "shut up. You don't understand who you are and who God is and we have no right to tell God how to be." But, I would like an answer beyond "Shut up".

For example, say person A recieves faith from God and person B is left in their sin. Person B gets justice and the other gets grace neither gets injustice. This is a truth in reformed theology. But, how can God still keep his sinless character by declaring one lost and the other sanctified and how is this truth so?

What if ....
What if Neither God's sovereignty nor human choice/responsibility work like Reformed theology suggests?

What if human responsibility is mitigated by knowledge, opportunity, culture, and a great many more factors?
What if God's sovereignty is mitigated by God's purposes, grace, compassion, love, kindness, and a host of attributes that are not here listed?

What if the net effect is to leave events happening in ways that are mysterious to people?

And what if seeking to pin it all down with a theory of theological sovereignty and human responsibility is a human vanity, a fault and a sin that leads to nothing but error and pride?

 

[JAL]

How does something that does not physically exist become something that does?

What didn't physically exist? I'm a material monist, like Tertullian. There was never a time when the divine matter failed to exist.

 

[JAL]

Who selects a soul to be a member of the Trinity? You said, "Had your soul been the one selected," but by whom? Who decided that I would not the Father, but the one who acts in the name of Father? It sounds like you are speaking of an even greater and ineffable principle behind the Trinity that decided who participates in the Trinitarian structure. I would not say that you are wrong, though.

I don't understand your reply. The Hypostatic Union is humanly incoherent regardless of which human soul was selected - you or someone else - and regardless of who does the selecting. You implied that a doctrine needs biblical proof. I'm still awaiting biblical proof for the theory that a created human soul can become a member of the uncreated Trinity.

 

[Jonaitis]

I don't understand your reply. The Hypostatic Union is humanly incoherent regardless of which human soul was selected - you or someone else - and regardless of who does the selecting. You implied that a doctrine needs biblical proof. I'm still awaiting biblical proof for the theory that a created human soul can become a member of the uncreated Trinity.

A human soul cannot become a member of the Trinity. That's nonsense.

 

[JAL]

A human soul cannot become a member of the Trinity. That's nonsense.

Was Christ's soul a created human soul?

 

[Jonaitis]

Was Christ's soul a created human soul?

Yes. It was a rational soul fit for human existence. This should not be confused with His Spirit (or divine nature).

 

[JAL]

Yes. It was a rational soul fit for human existence. This should not be confused with His Spirit (or divine nature).

You said it doesn't become a member of the Trinity. Ok then we are wrong to worship that soul who was the Christ? Are we to worship human souls outside of the Trinity?

 

[JAL]

Yes. It was a rational soul fit for human existence. This should not be confused with His Spirit (or divine nature).

I mean, I always thought that Jesus was supposed to be God. I still do. But you're saying this soul was NOT a member of the Trinity?
...(1). How does that make sense?
...(2). How is it biblically supported?

You want biblical support for my position? Christ's soul did NOT originate down here below (it was not one of us) but came down from above:

"For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me." (Jn 6:38).

"For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.." (vs 33).

"But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

Notice that last line? This "bread is my flesh" - THAT'S what came down from heaven. Again:


"The Word became flesh" (Jn 1:14).


I see no proof in Scripture that God placed one of us in Christ's body.

 

[Jonaitis]

You said it doesn't become a member of the Trinity. Ok then we are wrong to worship that soul who was the Christ? Are we to worship human souls outside of the Trinity?

Christ's rational soul is no more divine than his flesh. His divine nature is united, though not mixed, with a human existence (body and soul).

 

[Jonaitis]

I mean, I always thought that Jesus was supposed to be God. I still do. But you're saying this soul was NOT a member of the Trinity?
...(1). How does that make sense?
...(2). How is it biblically supported?

You want biblical support for my position? Christ's soul did NOT originate down here below (it was not one of us) but came down from above:

"For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me." (Jn 6:38).

"For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.." (vs 33).

"But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

Notice that last line? This "bread is my flesh" - THAT'S what came down from heaven. Again:


"The Word became flesh" (Jn 1:14).


I see no proof in Scripture that God placed one of us in Christ's body.

I suppose it is the traditional views of the creedal fathers, as well as in Protestantism. Christ's incarnation included a human soul and body. I cannot call that soul 'God' no more than the body.

Of course, depending on the context, I use "soul" to refer to different things.

 

[JAL]

I suppose it is the traditional views of the creedal fathers, as well as in Protestantism. Christ's incarnation included a human soul and body. I cannot call that soul 'God' no more than the body.

Of course, depending on the context, I use "soul" to refer to different things.

So supposedly God atoned for us, but the soul who actually did it was a created human soul, one that, you say, cannot even be called God.

You say its' the traditional view (as if it weren't your own view) but I'm pretty sure I asked you a moment ago if it was YOUR view that Christ's soul was created and you affirmed it.

- None of this makes ANY sense to the human mind.
- None of this has ANY clear biblical support. Oh that's right, the biblical support is for MY position.

 

[Neostarwcc]

No, Jesus was definitely God in the flesh. You might be able to raise the dead or do the miracles that Jesus did as a prophet. But no man God with him or not can raise HIMSELF from the dead. That's the miracle that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus was God.

 

[JAL]

No, Jesus was definitely God in the flesh. You might be able to raise the dead or do the miracles that Jesus did as a prophet. But no man God with him or not can raise HIMSELF from the dead. That's the miracle that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus was God.

Who are you addressing here? Of course Jesus was God in the flesh.

 

[JAL]

No, Jesus was definitely God in the flesh. You might be able to raise the dead or do the miracles that Jesus did as a prophet. But no man God with him or not can raise HIMSELF from the dead. That's the miracle that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus was God.

Maybe I missed your point. The traditional, mainstream, orthodox position is that God placed a created human soul in Christ's body. That's the official position of the church even to this day.

 

[Neostarwcc]

I was talking to Jonatis. He was trying to argue that a human soul couldn't become a part of the trinity.

 

[Tskjesusfreak]

How I look at it, is that the Lord will get the glory either way, if we take God's grace then we get the blessings of grace but if we turn away from Jesus we get His wrath. Also, I also take the approach "It is His universe, He gets to do what He wants."